United States v. Christopher Ray Plouffe

Good Law
436 F.3d 1062·2006 WL 120320·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 1086
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJanuary 18, 200605-30045California452 words

Opinion

Opinion

Gould, J.

Christopher Ray Plouffe appeals his 71-month sentence imposed after his guilty-plea conviction on one count of assault resulting in serious bodily harm in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 113 (a)(6) and 1153. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

We review sentences imposed after the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Booker for “unreasonableness.” 543 U.S. 220 , 125 S.Ct. 738, 765-66 , 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). In determining whether a sentence is unreasonable, we are guided by the sentencing factors set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3553 (a), including the sentencing range established by the Sentencing Guidelines. Id.

The district court considered Plouffe’s history and characteristics, which were described in the presentence report; Plouffe’s role in the offense; the need to protect the public while providing appropriate punishment for the offense; and the now-advisory Sentencing Guidelines range of 57-71 months. The court then imposed a sentence that was within the guideline range, albeit at the top of the range. The district court’s approach was reasoned and it addressed factors specified in § 3553(a). We conclude that Plouffe’s 71-month sentence is…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.